POLL - Should the UK monarchy now be abolished ? Y/N - all ATS members please contribute

PS I would like them to be returned to Germany with the exact amount of assets they arrived in the UK with.

Ignoring the fact they were born in the UK and are citizens of this country...

This kind of thinking is dangerous and simplistic in the extreme, the kind of thing I expect from BNP, EDL and UKIP supports, the people who like to
class people as "other" and threaten to make them irrelevant to the nation they were born in simply because they are considered different to the
"white, Christian citizen".

Hmm, sound familiar? And how sickening that these opinions are still being preached on the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.

Aww, cupcake. You find it highly offensive that people other than those you deem worthy have an opinion on something? How unbelievably arrogant. What
about me? As a Canadian, the old biddy is on my money, same as yours.

Aww, cupcake. You find it highly offensive that people other than those you deem worthy have an opinion on something? How unbelievably arrogant. What
about me? As a Canadian, the old biddy is on my money, same as yours.

You are Canadian and you feel that you have the right to have a say on whether England has a monarchy?

Perhaps then English people should be included in the Canadian elections and have a say in whether Stephen Harper is PM in Canada then?

Who the hell do you people think you are? You're welcome to your opinion... but it is worth absolutely nothing as you do not have the RIGHT to vote
on it!

I think the monarchy is an issue in the UK for the devolved nations, not just England (i.e. includes Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland).

Then there is the monarch's role in myriad nations as the Head of State, or Queen, such as New Zealand, Canada and Papua New Guinea to name but three
(of many).

Then there's the British Overseas Territories and Crown dependencies where the Queen is the monarch and has a role.

So, while I agree that people from some countries should not participate in such votes, even though they hold opinions, I don't think a vote on the
existence of the UK monarch should just be confined to the English.

Quite a lot of people have a vested interest in the existence (or not) of the UK monarchy. If the monarch was abolished there would be a global
impact.

I think the monarchy is an issue in the UK for the devolved nations, not just England (i.e. includes Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland).

Then there is the monarch's role in myriad nations as the Head of State, or Queen, such as New Zealand, Canada and Papua New Guinea to name but three
(of many).

Then there's the British Overseas Territories and Crown dependencies where the Queen is the monarch and has a role.

So, while I agree that people from some countries should not participate in such votes, even though they hold opinions, I don't think a vote on the
existence of the UK monarch should just be confined to the English.

Quite a lot of people have a vested interest in the existence (or not) of the UK monarchy. If the monarch was abolished there would be a global
impact.

Regards

Quite!

Absolutely Her Majesty is head of state for the UK and for other nations, she is still however primarily 'Her Royal Highness the Queen of England'.

The reason Her Majesty has anything to do with any other nations is due to the Commonwealth, which was formed during the British Empire. As the
countries that form the Commonwealth are now independent nations, there is no direct link to the monarchy other than the fact that the Royal Family
owns the land of these nations by right.

As I already mentioned even the British people as commoners do not have the right to vote on the Monarchy... it is not a democracy! So this is why it
is totally offensive to say that any other citizen of any other nation should have a vote on it!

By your same logic, should we state then that other nations as well as America should have the right to vote in US Elections?

You're aware that this is neither a scientific poll or any sort of binding vote, right? I think that you should get a grip. The queen is the head of
state in Canada, I wonder why you find it so offensive that I should have an opinion on it. How miserable you must be, to choose to be 'highly
offended' over people expressing their opinions. I wonder what else offends you.

Again, I can't quite get past the fact that you seem to think that this thread, a measure of the sentiment on an internet forum, is equivalent to an
actual national election. Its both infuriating and hilarious that someody could be so thick.

You're aware that this is neither a scientific poll or any sort of binding vote, right? I think that you should get a grip. The queen is the head of
state in Canada, I wonder why you find it so offensive that I should have an opinion on it. How miserable you must be, to choose to be 'highly
offended' over people expressing their opinions. I wonder what else offends you.

Your ignorance of why your comments would make an English person angry is the reason why!

a reply to: uncommitted
I understand not everyone shares my viewpoint. I am comparing the sample of ATS members and their common ideals.

As a generalisation of the sample of members here on ATS I would say it is not out of the question to assume more than 60% of members would be against
the monarchy.

As 'uncommitted' said, which you must have missed:

On a conspiracy site where the majority typically would regard anything seen as 'mainstream' or 'part of the establishment' with mistrust, I think
it's quite telling that actually 60% is quite low, especially since it includes so many who have only the vaguest concept of what modern monarchy
actually is.

I use terms like scum because, this may seem obvious, I believe they are scum. Check my post history, I've close links with the Royal family and my
views are not hidden.

What I would like to ask, and I would put this to you as a task, using only my use of the word 'scum' - can you summarise what this reveals about me
which I do not realise is being revealed? You can U2U me your answer as it would derail this thread even more than I have already.

Call the internet police, I've made a post which refers to the idea we have common ideals AND I generalised within the post!

EDIT: I can't believe I just wasted 10 minutes of my life replying to you.

edit on 27-1-2015 by and14263 because: Because I am not the only loser

Absolutely she is head of state for the UK and for other nations, she is still however primarily Her Royal Highness the Queen of England.

No she most definitely is not....in the UK her correct title is Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

England doesn't even get a mention on it's own.

Personally I've only ever known American's call her The Queen of England.

The reason Her Majesty has anything to do with any other nations is due to the Commonwealth, which was formed during the British Empire. As the
countries that form the Commonwealth are now independent nations, there is no direct link to the monarchy other than the fact that the Royal Family
owns the land of these nations by right.

No she does not.
Exactly WHAT right is it you speak of that says she OWNS these lands?

Absolute nonsense.

As I already mentioned even the British people as commoners do not have the right to vote on the Monarchy... it is not a democracy! So this is why it
is totally offensive to say that any other citizen of any other nation should have a vote on it!

Calm down - its not legally binding!
Its just an opinion poll of the membership of a relatively obscure online community website, of course people are entitled to 'vote' regardless of
how irrelevant that 'vote' may be.

By your same logic, should we state then that other nations as well as America should have the right to vote in US Elections?

It probably wouldn't do any harm.....it would probably stop all those Bush's getting elected.....but that's not the issue here.
And no-one is advocating anything of the sort.

Absolutely she is head of state for the UK and for other nations, she is still however primarily Her Royal Highness the Queen of England.

No she most definitely is not....in the UK her correct title is Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

England doesn't even get a mention on it's own.

Personally I've only ever known American's call her The Queen of England.

The reason Her Majesty has anything to do with any other nations is due to the Commonwealth, which was formed during the British Empire. As the
countries that form the Commonwealth are now independent nations, there is no direct link to the monarchy other than the fact that the Royal Family
owns the land of these nations by right.

No she does not.
Exactly WHAT right is it you speak of that says she OWNS these lands?

Absolute nonsense.

As I already mentioned even the British people as commoners do not have the right to vote on the Monarchy... it is not a democracy! So this is why it
is totally offensive to say that any other citizen of any other nation should have a vote on it!

Calm down - its not legally binding!
Its just an opinion poll of the membership of a relatively obscure online community website, of course people are entitled to 'vote' regardless of how
irrelevant that 'vote' may be.

By your same logic, should we state then that other nations as well as America should have the right to vote in US Elections?

It probably wouldn't do any harm.....it would probably stop all those Bush's getting elected.....but that's not the issue here.
And no-one is advocating anything of the sort.

Korg.

Let me ask you these questions...

1. Where was the Queen born?

2. Where was she coronated?

3. Who were the Queens parents?

4. What house does the queen belong to? and where is that?

5. Where are the Queens palaces?

6. Was the British Monarch the head of state of any other nation before the British Empire and the Commonwealth?

#1 Queen Elizabeth II
Land: 6.6 billion acres of land worldwide including Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia and a few other spots here and there. Also, the
all-important Falkland Islands.

With her 6.6 billion acres, Elizabeth II is far and away the world's largest landowner, with the closest runner-up (King Abdullah) holding control
over a mere 547 million, or about 12% of the lands owned by Her Majesty, The Queen.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.